I suspect precisely that. Yes. He's a worker of a winger, as we all know, and can tuck inside which Roy Hodgson seems to like in his teams: natural width on one flank (Ashley Young tonight), and the opposite winger moving inside to help clog up midfield. The frustration, as you suggest, is that Milner worked his way into a couple of excellent positions against the French, muscling away from Patrice Evra, but never really offered enough with his delivery from wide. And, of course, there was the chance created by Young when Milner took it round Hugo Lloris but only found the side-netting with his shot. Perhaps we shouldn't have expected much else: of Milner, Theo Walcott, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain and Stewart Downing in this squad, a quartet with a combined 89 caps, the only goals managed in an England shirt came from Walcott in Zagreb when he scored a hat-trick back in 2008.

Whether or not Walcott would offer considerably more accuracy in his crossing is open to question. The Arsenal winger has been assured he will get game-time in this tournament – and he will surely play some part at some stage this evening – but there was an interesting quote from Hodgson after the Belgium game when he implied Walcott hasn't always grasped his opportunities at this level, and that managers can be as criticised for picking him as leaving him out. Which might suggest he will have to be patient before he gets to play a proper part.

Is Jones likely to start ahead of Johnson against either of Ukraine or Sweden? If Hodgson wants more attacking brio, ie less tracking back, then might he be tempted to go for the more conservative RB, similar to how at Man City Zabaleta will usually start in games they have to really go for the win?

Can't see it. Certainly, we expect Johnson to start in Kiev this evening and he would be first-choice for Ukraine, too, on Monday (is that right? losing track of the time over here...) unless suspension or injury have kicked in. He's still playing with this toe infection – he's been on antibiotics for about five weeks now, apparently, and it's still lingering and causes discomfort the day after games – but Hodgson will want to rely upon an established, experienced right-back. As for Jones, he seems to have been used as back-up in virtually every position bar goalkeeper on this trip so far: he began as a reserve midfielder, then became Johnson's deputy at right-back, and is now considered fourth-choice centre-half. At some stage, in the next few years, you'd hope he'd establish himself in his best position for club and country. At the moment, he seems a bit of a jack-of-all-trades who is hopefully, at least, gaining some experience out on the trip.

We've been hearing a lot about how England plan to attack, namely crosses and headers where the Swedes are vulnerable. Any word on Roy's instructions to the defence, and dealing with Zlatan in particular?

You'd expect Scott Parker, who's likely to be the deepest lying midfielder, to get closest to Ibrahimovic with England clearly wary of the threat he poses. My colleague, Stuart James, pinpointed the issue today in his scouting report on the Swedes – and there were warm words of praise and respect for Ibrahimovic from both Roy Hodgson and Steven Gerrard last night at the pre-match press conference. The general tone was 'give him a bit of time and space and he might win the game for Sweden on his own'.

Certainly, no one is relying upon his distinctly average record against English sides over the years (three goals in 15 meetings). So you'd expect Parker to try and stifle him when he drops into that pocket behind, presumably, Elmander and one of the centre-halves to monitor his movement when he ventures further up-field. But, as for detailing any plan, they've not made anything public. Instead, England's training drills seem to be emphasising the need to find more attacking spark of their own.

I think there's a sound logic to selecting Carroll against Sweden. Personally, I was impressed with how he held the ball up in Norway last month and, while he missed an opportunity from his clearest sight of goal (an early header from a Stewart Downing cross), he played his part in setting up Ashley Young for the winner. I got some Twitter grief at the time for suggesting the deft touch he showed in the build-up to that goal was reminiscent of Ibrahimovic, but it was certainly cleverly executed and nicely delivered on the turn.

Against Sweden, as Daniel Taylor highlighted this morning – he will be up against a team that have proved vulnerable in the air despite being the tallest at this tournament. Six of the last seven goals shipped have been to headers, including the two that Andriy Shevchenko managed in Kiev on Monday. So why not play on that weakness and select the forward who's strongest in the air? Certainly, while Rooney is absent, we need to juggle our options on a game-by-game basis.

The point on delivery is, however, pertinent. There has to be an improvement here, and the hope is that Young, as arguably England's most accurate crosses, will find himself in positions to inflict his own damage. Carroll will be blunt without the delivery. But if the wingers, can turn Sweden's defenders and reach the by-line, and then test the centre-halves with crosses at pace, England may find some joy. That's the theory, anyway. We all have to hope Carroll displays the form of the last few weeks of Liverpool's season rather than some of the earlier stages, and that he can strike up an immediate understanding with Danny Welbeck to ensure they don't cramp each other for space in the middle. They've never played together at senior level before, so this is a night of firsts ...

To what extent did the BBC Panorama documentary fuel the alleged racist incidents? Sources suggest that the mindless groups of idiots in Poland & Ukraine were encouraged to know that organisations such as the BBC would give them the oxygen of mass publicity they so desperately craved.

Do journalists have responsibility to consider the consequences of their actions, or is willfully whipping up a story fair game?

Do you think the tournament has been blighted by negative reporting, or are Poland & Ukraine really the violent backward backwaters of Europe?

I guess that was a risk in examining the issue, as Sky had previously, and both reports did cause a stir over here with local journalists feeling – understandably – that only the negative aspects of football / sport / society in Poland and Ukraine had been highlighted. Clearly, the programmes made for uncomfortable viewing and, yes, journalists do have a responsibility to consider the consequences of their actions. But they also have a responsibility, surely, to expose issues like this. Did the Panorama documentary fuel the incidents? I'm doubtful, to be honest. There clearly is a problem here at some level, as has since unfortunately become clear with the incidents of alleged racist abuse at, for example, the Dutch training camp. Efforts have been and are being made to deal with it locally. My colleague, Daniel Taylor, wrote about this in his column for the Observer earlier in the tournament. Personally, I've found visits to both countries wonderfully welcoming so far even if the atmosphere has been, well, fiery at times particularly when the Poles and Russians were approaching their match.

Anyone remember... "Brolin, Dahlin... Brolin!!!" The irony is, I think we'll out Sweden, Sweden tonight and win by the same scoreline as it was 20 years ago reversing the karma... Thoughts? And does anyone care to help me find where those 20 years went?

My memories of Brolin are dominated rather more by his exploding head bandage in a game for Crystal Palace against his former club, Leeds, at Selhurst Park. The visiting fans found it all a bit too amusing ... And didn't he once crash his car into an elk?!?

I've not witnessed any 'clashing'. The atmosphere here in Kiev seems pretty amiable between the two sets of supporters. The Swedes have rather taken over, but that's fair enough given the team's based here and they've played here already. A bit of chanting at each other shouldn't really constitute a clash, no.

But where would you play him? On the left of midfield? He will not displace Ashley Cole from the side at left-back, even if the Chelsea player is still hampered by this ankle problem he's had for years. I take the point that Baines' delivery can be outstanding, but I'm not sure selecting two left-backs to patrol the flank would send out the right messages. Not least to Stewart Downing and Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, who are now waiting an opportunity again behind Ashley Young ...

Philipp Lahm addressed this ahead of the Champions League final when he was considering Chelsea's anticipated defensive style of play (born of the Barcelona semi-finals). He conjured up this terrifying image of two teams stubbornly sitting in formation, camped inside their own halves, with a lone forward looking bewildered and isolated as the only team-mate in 'enemy territory', and the ball just being pinged quietly around with no intent whatsoever to go forward. Mind-numbingly awful. But also, thankfully, impossible. Both these teams need to win the game this evening so, at some stage, the shackles have to come off. Please. They really do have to. Surely. Don't they? Otherwise, stick the kettle on or something ...

It seems obvious that the England players (and Ireland players) are nowhere nearly as technical on the ball as the other major teams. Do you see this ever changing? Looking back, Gascoigne was the last great midfielder for England, but not good enough even in his prime to get into the great teams in Europe - why then is there pressure on England at all to even get out of the group when there are no great players in the team?

When do you think England will win a major trophy again? They play such a different style of football than their major competitors, low technique, fast in-accurate ball, do you think they ever will?

This issue of being 'technically deficient' cropped up last night at the Olympic Stadium when Hodgson and Gerrard faced the media. Their answers might be revealing. Hodgson was asked if English players "lacked technique", to which he replied: "No, I don't. Full stop." When asked the follow-up, to explain the inaccuracy of, say, the final ball, he added: "It's the point I've been making for 36 years with all the teams I've worked with. You work to get into the position to score a goal, and it depends on the quality of that final pass or ball. I would question any suggestions we are lacking in ay way or that our players are not technically good enough. We have some of the best players in the world playing in the Premier League."

The worry, of course, is that a lot of those 'best players' aren't English, a reality that may now be exacerbated by the latest television rights deal negotiated by the Premier League with Sky, BT etc. With more money flooding into the elite clubs, the temptation will surely be to purchase more of the best talent from abroad. Anyway ...

The same question was later put to Gerrard, who offered: "These people who have that opinion are watching Spain and Barcelona. Of course we are not as technically gifted as that team or those type of players. They are the best in the world. What we haven't got in technique, maybe we gain on them in heart and desire and commitment." Which felt like a return to old-fashioned values, the fall-back option for the cliched 'English game'.

I don't think it will change any time soon, even if the Football Association are making huge strides in terms of youth coaching etc. Theirs is a long-term vision. The short-term feels like more of the same. But as for pressure for England to get out of the group, surely this is the first tournament in years where there seems to be very little pressure on the national team to hoist themselves out of the section. There's a realism about the place at the moment, given all the upheaval in the build-up, Rooney's suspension and the injuries that have disrupted preparations. Players have actually been attempting to dress some "we can win it" mentality into press briefings out here because the media have been so wary of jumping the gun. Which is all a bit of a role reversal.

When will England win a major trophy again ...? Well, Greece won the Euros in 2004. Denmark in 1992. Neither played a particularly expansive style of football, so it can be done. There's merit in solidity and industry to a point, but you need to be ruthless and, admittedly, have a slice of luck as well.

It's 'his' system and the formation he feels best suits the players he has at his disposal. I agree: a 4-2-3-1 feels a more natural fit these days but, if you're playing that way and looking to counter, it might help to have a Didier Drogba style forward leading the line and bringing those creative, quick players in the trio behind into play. Hodgson clearly doesn't feel he has that player, even if Carroll and Welbeck have their qualities. Things may change when Rooney returns from suspension, but I doubt it. The manager is concentrating on making England stingy and secure first of all, and he feels the best way of achieving that is by flinging down two banks of four and challenging opponents to play through us. Sweden and Ukraine may struggle to do so. Spain and Germany might quite relish the chance.

Not in the slightest (though I suspect the question was tongue in cheek). Hodgson's been employed to offer some long-term vision to the England set-up, and not just with this tournament in mind. His appointment made so much sense in terms of the brief being advertised by the Football Association, and he will surely be eager to impact some of his years of experience upon young, up-and-coming coaches attending St George's Park from September.

Gerrard seemed to come into quite a bit of praise after the opening game, with a lot of people even expressing 'shock' that he showed tactical discipline. With reports seeming to indicate that England will be utilizing crosses into the box and Gerrard given the brief to move forward for any potential knockdowns, what will the ramifications be on the rest of the midfield?

I suspect he'll still have that deep-lying brief in principle this evening but, if England gain more of the ball, he should have more of an opportunity to maraud up-field than he did against the French. As well as he did in a defensive role against France, it always feels as if we are not tapping into his best qualities if we don't offer him some licence to charge forward. This isn't his natural position. He's more instinctively an attacking midfielder, clearly, so he has to find a way of combining both roles: tactical discipline when England lack the ball, and inventive and incisive when we are in possession.

This is what he said about his demands changing tonight: "Everyone's role maybe changes slightly. With all due respect to Sweden, they are not France. I can't tell you they are a similar standard to Sweden. You know yourselves. That means the whole team can be slightly more ambitious and we can attack more and maybe take slightly more risks. Then you will see a better performance going forward from the team. More importantly, the team needs to be solid and together. That is the major positive to take from the first game rather than lacking ambition going forward."

Which suggests he will have a significant role to play at each end of the pitch ...

Do you think Danny Welbeck is a very lucky boy, a man of limited ability who now seems to be an automatic pick for his country when he is argauably a first-choice for his club? To think the likes of Fowler, Ian Wright, Les Ferdianand etc could barely muster 70 caps between them. How times change?

Well, indeed. When you list those forwards it does show we've been blessed at times in the past (not that we've actually achieved much on the international stage.....). Welbeck may be fortunate, but he's also got huge potential. Manchester United recognise that. Sir Alex Ferguson had told Fabio Capello back in 2009 to take him to the World Cup, so he spied the raw ability there. But I agree: he does need to score more goals at club level, and clearly continue to develop his game. Having seen him deal with the media a few times now in his short England career, I have to say I admire his self-confidence. He comes across very well - we saw him on Tuesday this week - and is very level-headed about his progress and what he wants to go on and achieve. I think we have to be encouraged to have a 21-year-old and a 23-year-old potentially leading the line tonight. That does, surely, bode well for the future if these players continue to develop.

Do you have any insight into the effect that having Gary Neville in the coaching team is having? He was really impressive this season for Sky, so I'd expect he'd be a positive contributor to the setup, but what's the word amongst the squad?

He's been hugely impressive on Sky all season, and the players who have spoken about him over here have been glowing in their praise. He sounds as if he's the go-to man, someone they seek out for advice given he was, until very recently, 'one of them'. Welbeck, a club-mate up until the end of 2010, said as much earlier this week. He's sure to have some tactical input on some level, even if Hodgson calls the shots, and his is clearly a reassuring presence within the set-up.

Anyone else doing badly with their predictions? OK, I did expect nil points for Ireland - who didn't apart from Ireland's own fans? - but Holland and Poland, you'd imagine their considerable fire power would at least get them very comfortably out of the group. I thought Holland could win it. Best showings so far: Spain, Germany, Italy, Croatia. Shame for Croatia that they've got a God-awful group.

Er. I predicted Holland to beat France in the final. So I'm clearly having a bit of a stinker, too. Though I'm encouraged Alan Dzagoev is doing so well. Shouldn't really go in for predictions. I'm still living down my "there's no chance Manchester City will win the title" comments in the wake of their defeat to Arsenal towards the end of last season. Add to that "Chelsea don't have a prayer" ahead of Barcelona and I covered myself in glory, there...

This webchat has now finished. A selection of Dominic's answers to your questions are below.